Brett Whiteley (Braddon, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

For those that may be listening—sitting in their cars, watching on TV or online, or the small number in the gallery—it is very easy and very tempting to be drawn in by rhetoric. It is very easy to have big number targets to make a political party look like they are in touch with the nation. It is very easy, just like it was to say, 'We're going to have surpluses,' and never deliver. The member for Sydney, as the opposition spokesman, talks about another $20 billion worth of foreign aid, but we have never seen any commitment to that in a budgetary sense. Those opposite talk about tax reform; they are full of rhetoric, but when it comes to actually leaving things on the table for a serious debate, they run a million miles. So I would say to those people listening: don't ever listen to my rhetoric, don't ever listen to the Prime Minister's rhetoric and certainly don't listen to the rhetoric on the other side. Look at the outcomes.

When it comes to renewable energy, which this MPI is about, let's talk about the outcomes. There was great discussion in the Howard era around signing the Kyoto agreement. But here is the reality: we surpassed the Kyoto agreement. We then moved to the next phase of a bipartisan commitment of 20 per cent of our energy use to be renewable by 2020. We are well on track for that to be 23½ per cent. So don't listen to the rhetoric. Look at the outcomes.

It is true that when you ask or do a survey of your constituents that renewable energy is very popular in the community. If you ask anybody whether we should be working towards more renewable energy, of course the response will be 70 or 80 per cent positive. But here is the kicker, which no-one ever wants to talk about: if you add just the slight addition to the question of 'Do you support more embracing of renewable energy at any cost to your family's budget?', I would suggest to everybody listening today that that number would be nowhere near 70 or 80 per cent. People would want clarification on what the cost of that popular embrace would be.

So let me tell you the facts as they stand right now. If you want to pay the cost of generating energy through coal or, in fact, hydro—I come from the state of Tasmania and we were dealing in renewable energy well before most other people's electorates in this place—it comes at a cost of around $35 or $40 a megawatt hour. If you want to deal in gas to generate your energy, the costs are $65 a megawatt hour. Wind is somewhere between $85 and $115, so let's call it $100 a megawatt hour. Solar comes at a cost of over $200 for every megawatt hour. Why do I raise this? I raise it simply to make this point: it comes at a cost to someone.

If you want to achieve renewable energy targets that are being pushed by the opposition, without any regard to the financial impact on the bottom line of the budget and, in turn, on the bottom line of family budgets, you have to take this into account. If you want renewable energy there are two options. Firstly, the government, the taxpayer—the government does not have money; we only have the people's money—has to subsidise those generating costs so that it is affordable to use solar, as we did with the subsidies we provided for years, so that families can afford that good feeling of renewable energy. Secondly, forget the subsidies. Who pays? The consumer has to pay the total cost. They are the facts. There are no other options. I hear those opposite being very quiet. You can hear the crickets over there. There are no other options. Either the government subsidises it or the taxpayer pays it. Either way, the taxpayer pays.

So I would ask everyone listening: do not take account of the rhetoric; take account of the outcomes. What would be the outcome for an Australian family as a result of the targets that those opposite are espousing? I will tell you what it is: it would be absolutely disastrous. Your electricity bills across Australia, folks, are way too dear now. If you think they are dear under the current arrangement and you want to take on board their policies then the cost will go up tenfold overnight. (Time expired)

See this speech in context